"Telamon" wrote in message
...

As has been shown, even at FCC level, there is no significant usage of
stations adjacent to locals in each market. So there is no loss if there
is
what ammounts to unmeasurable listening.

Again the marketing viewpoint. This isn't a radio marketing news group
it is a hobby news group where people listen for other reasons than
tuning in for the programming material. That is not to say that the
programming is not the reason as I have tuned in out of market stations
to get programs not offered in my area.

When I began DXing, I not only joined NRC, NNRC, IRC, MWC, NZDXL, etc., but
I also subscribed to Broadcasting and Sponsor and such and learned about the
reason why I was hearing what I heard. Now, you say hobbyists have no
interest in the actual stations they listen too. You just gave me another
reason not to answer verification (QSL) requests.

I don't hear listeners complaining. I hear mostly DXers whining.

You don't care about DXers in your job but you should posting to this
news group.

As a DXer going back to 1958, I think it is important for DXers to know
about the radio business. If you want to live in a fantasy land, and get
angry about HD, then that is OK. But don't condemn radio as an industry for
doing what most of us think is right for the future.

The greater good is trying to preserve the existing free terrestrial
broadcast system, which will not endure unless a digital alternative is
offered.

We got that through numerous posts you have made.

You may have. DXass certainly hasn't, nor has Steve and the now-absent
"IBOC_Sucks" guy.

Well I hate to break it to you but listening to adjacent stations is
"done" by the people reading this news group. How many times does
someone have to post a complaint here that IBOC degrades their
reception? Please don't come back with the marketing perspective because
I get it already.

the symbiotic relationship is changing. You should know about it.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:


"Telamon" wrote in message
...

As has been shown, even at FCC level, there is no significant usage of
stations adjacent to locals in each market. So there is no loss if there
is
what ammounts to unmeasurable listening.

Again the marketing viewpoint. This isn't a radio marketing news group
it is a hobby news group where people listen for other reasons than
tuning in for the programming material. That is not to say that the
programming is not the reason as I have tuned in out of market stations
to get programs not offered in my area.

When I began DXing, I not only joined NRC, NNRC, IRC, MWC, NZDXL, etc., but
I also subscribed to Broadcasting and Sponsor and such and learned about the
reason why I was hearing what I heard. Now, you say hobbyists have no
interest in the actual stations they listen too. You just gave me another
reason not to answer verification (QSL) requests.

Snip

Where did I indicate that I or others don't care about the stations we
listen too? I'm saying other people have reasons other than my own.

Some people like to DX stations, which often are the adjacent channels
to the locals. I don't DX to get QSL cards but other people do as a
hobby. I listen to out of market stations for the programming because I
am a program listener. I also tune through the AMBCB day and night to
see what distant stations I can hear. IBOC is limiting what I can hear.
I actually spend most of my listening time to out of my market stations
from the LA and San Diego areas by day and points further north and east
of me like KGO and KOH at night.

I spend the majority listening of my AMBCB listening to KOGO, KFI, KABC,
KNX and the local KVTA by day and add KGO and KOH at night. I spend a
little time with KTMS during the day, I can't get them very well at
night.

I would listen to KRLA but they put in a lousy signal even during the
day.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

Snip

Where did I indicate that I or others don't care about the stations we
listen too? I'm saying other people have reasons other than my own.

If you say there is no interest in knowing about HD, then there is a de
facto lack of interest in the stations.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

Snip

Where did I indicate that I or others don't care about the stations we
listen too? I'm saying other people have reasons other than my own.

If you say there is no interest in knowing about HD, then there is a de
facto lack of interest in the stations.

I know about HD and I don't think it has big enough payoff for the
listener for the cost of equipment.

I do not like the way HD is being implemented on AMBCB causing
interference to distant stations.

I don't like the fact that IBOC adversely affects my listening of analog
signals.

I listen to stations that are transmitting IBOC but I don't have a
receiver to get the digital signal. I might get a HD radio when the V2
radios come out if the IBOC standard continues to look stable. For
starters the makers of HD radios should make them upgradable and I
would like IBOC to be an open standard.

Where do my posts indicate a non-interest about AMBCB stations that use
IBOC?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

David Eduardo wrote:
The greater good is trying to preserve the existing free terrestrial
broadcast system, which will not endure unless a digital alternative is
offered.

We got that through numerous posts you have made.

You may have. DXass certainly hasn't, nor has Steve and the now-absent
"IBOC_Sucks" guy.


And yet, you're the one who wrote, in post 173, that AM will never
become primarily digital and, in fact, you say you "have never heard it
discussed."

I think you need to get your story straight. Is digital the future or
not? And don't tell me that you think the "digital alternative" is the
half assed deployment of HD we've seen over the last couple of years.
If that's the case, then it's totally nap time for this thread.

"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...

David Eduardo wrote:
The greater good is trying to preserve the existing free terrestrial
broadcast system, which will not endure unless a digital alternative
is
offered.

We got that through numerous posts you have made.

You may have. DXass certainly hasn't, nor has Steve and the now-absent
"IBOC_Sucks" guy.


And yet, you're the one who wrote, in post 173, that AM will never
become primarily digital and, in fact, you say you "have never heard it
discussed."

I think that most listening in the future will be to the digital signal, not
the analog. I have never heard anyone talk about turning analog off.

David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
David Eduardo wrote:
The greater good is trying to preserve the existing free terrestrial
broadcast system, which will not endure unless a digital alternative
is
offered.
We got that through numerous posts you have made.
You may have. DXass certainly hasn't, nor has Steve and the now-absent
"IBOC_Sucks" guy.
And yet, you're the one who wrote, in post 173, that AM will never
become primarily digital and, in fact, you say you "have never heard it
discussed."

I think that most listening in the future will be to the digital signal, not
the analog. I have never heard anyone talk about turning analog off.




I've spoken with two GM's, now, who've said they can't wait to shut
the analog off, and save the cost of power. Especially with energy costs
about to skyrocket here, that can be quite a difference in the bottom line.

I know they talk amongst each other, and I know it's been discussed
for some future date. Nothing official, of course. And nothing from the
Commission. But it's being discussed. And like analog TV, when the
digital audience reaches a certain saturation, it would be fiscally
silly to continue to support a mode that's not being listened to.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
David Eduardo wrote:
The greater good is trying to preserve the existing free terrestrial
broadcast system, which will not endure unless a digital alternative
is
offered.
We got that through numerous posts you have made.
You may have. DXass certainly hasn't, nor has Steve and the now-absent
"IBOC_Sucks" guy.
And yet, you're the one who wrote, in post 173, that AM will never
become primarily digital and, in fact, you say you "have never heard it
discussed."

I think that most listening in the future will be to the digital signal,
not the analog. I have never heard anyone talk about turning analog off.




I've spoken with two GM's, now, who've said they can't wait to shut the
analog off, and save the cost of power. Especially with energy costs about
to skyrocket here, that can be quite a difference in the bottom line.

That is an interesting reason... spend $100 k at least to go HD, and then
shut off analog to save a couple of thousand.

I just do not think that there would be a win for at least a decade by being
only digital.

I know they talk amongst each other, and I know it's been discussed for
some future date. Nothing official, of course. And nothing from the
Commission. But it's being discussed. And like analog TV, when the digital
audience reaches a certain saturation, it would be fiscally silly to
continue to support a mode that's not being listened to.

This sounds more like the FCC, which is responsible for the sunset law on
analog TV. Hopefully, this was a lesson learned that you can not force
consumers to buy things they do not yet want.

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message
ups.com...
David Eduardo wrote:
The greater good is trying to preserve the existing free terrestrial
broadcast system, which will not endure unless a digital alternative
is
offered.
We got that through numerous posts you have made.
You may have. DXass certainly hasn't, nor has Steve and the now-absent
"IBOC_Sucks" guy.
And yet, you're the one who wrote, in post 173, that AM will never
become primarily digital and, in fact, you say you "have never heard it
discussed."
I think that most listening in the future will be to the digital signal,
not the analog. I have never heard anyone talk about turning analog off.



I've spoken with two GM's, now, who've said they can't wait to shut the
analog off, and save the cost of power. Especially with energy costs about
to skyrocket here, that can be quite a difference in the bottom line.

That is an interesting reason... spend $100 k at least to go HD, and then
shut off analog to save a couple of thousand.


$100k is a Cap item. The couple of thousand is recurring. When we
bought into the new combiner on the top of the Hancock and upgraded our
antenna, we dropped more than $1.3M and no one batted an eye. But we
were still reusing the toner in the copy machine, and bitching about the
airconditioning bill in the summer. No one blinks at the Cap item when
it can result in recurring savings.

Especially when use of the analog stream falls below the use of the
HD stream, and with as many distribution outlets many stations are
investigating, a GM will get a real itch to shut down the analog stream,
and save that outflow for something more profitable.





I just do not think that there would be a win for at least a decade by being
only digital.


I think that may be a bit optimistic. Given the rate at which radio
use in general is declining, (and this has been a fairly recently
documented phenomenon...even as late as last year, the numbers suggested
that things were only off slightly...Bridge has been reporting sizeable
erosion for the last two quarters, now) and given the difficulty, at
least from where I sit, in listening to AM signals, and the lack of
options for retrieving some content once the IBOC hash blots out the
available signals, I don't expect things to remain viable for analog AM
for anything near a decade.

Let me give you an example...where I am, far north suburbs of
Chicago, about a 3 wood from Waukegan...I've got two AM's, one
Milwaukee, one in Chicago, that carry Rush Limbaugh. If I want to
consume that content, those are my choices. There is no local station
offering that content. As the IBOC rash spreads, those stations, WISN
and WLS will become closed to me. They're nearly impossible to catch
some days, anyway, due to noise. The Din of iBiquity would close them
entirely, as it has a number of other stations formerly available here.
And you know I'm no slouch when I want a signal. But even I can't pull
content out of the noise where IBOC is concerned.

Now, I'm part of Chicago metro. So is Pete Gianakopoulos. But we're
going to be under served when the IBOC rash spreads to the rest of the
dial. And there is no alternative, no local frequency, offering what's
available from the Chicago and Milwaukee AM's. Rush isn't on FM around
here. And he's not on XM or Sirius.

Air America, where I am, is no longer listenable.

So, there's content put off limits by the laws of physics, where the
FCC's model says we should be enjoying AM reception from the market to
which we belong.

In that light, keeping the analog stream alive for a decade is more
or less, just silly.

Now, I realize that my mileage may vary...but I can't be the only one
experiencing this. Nor can this be the only area it's happening.

Eventually, the conversation about terminating analog AM will extend
beyond the coffee bars between GM's and into much higher places where
things get decided in earnest.









I know they talk amongst each other, and I know it's been discussed for
some future date. Nothing official, of course. And nothing from the
Commission. But it's being discussed. And like analog TV, when the digital
audience reaches a certain saturation, it would be fiscally silly to
continue to support a mode that's not being listened to.

This sounds more like the FCC, which is responsible for the sunset law on
analog TV. Hopefully, this was a lesson learned that you can not force
consumers to buy things they do not yet want.


Apparently, a lesson not yet learned. At least not judging by this
newsgroup.

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
news

$100k is a Cap item. The couple of thousand is recurring.

But the cap item depreciation hits each year and quarter. Granted, it does
not impact EBITDA, but if you are a non-public corporation, that would not
matter... it is money out of pocket.

When we bought into the new combiner on the top of the Hancock and
upgraded our antenna, we dropped more than $1.3M and no one batted an eye.
But we were still reusing the toner in the copy machine, and bitching
about the airconditioning bill in the summer. No one blinks at the Cap
item when it can result in recurring savings.

I guess some companies look at it that way. I wish I had a huge capex budget
like that!

Especially when use of the analog stream falls below the use of the HD
stream, and with as many distribution outlets many stations are
investigating, a GM will get a real itch to shut down the analog stream,
and save that outflow for something more profitable.

I am an HD supporter, but I can nrealistically see this tipping point int he
next 5 to 7 years. Can you? I don't even know if AM will survive.


I think that may be a bit optimistic. Given the rate at which radio use
in general is declining, (and this has been a fairly recently documented
phenomenon...even as late as last year, the numbers suggested that things
were only off slightly..

The decline in cume is very small. 2% since '65. The listening time is off 2
hours off a base of 21 for the average listener, and that is since 1988. So
we have nearly 10% or a rate of nearly a percent a year. However, the
erosion is mostly in non-servable demos, teens and 55+ with some 18-24, but
far less. There are so many reasons for all this that it is not easily
analyzed.

.Bridge has been reporting sizeable erosion for the last two quarters, now)
and given the difficulty, at least from where I sit, in listening to AM
signals, and the lack of options for retrieving some content once the IBOC
hash blots out the available signals, I don't expect things to remain
viable for analog AM for anything near a decade.

Bridge really lacks credibility to me. They use a marketing model of
Awareness - Trial _ Usage and not a broad sample nor much ethnic sample
(they apparently have no Hisanic interviewers, as far as I know) and the
data is suspect. Arbittron has a lot of data on the website, with immense
samples over a million a year.

Let me give you an example...where I am, far north suburbs of Chicago,
about a 3 wood from Waukegan...I've got two AM's, one Milwaukee, one in
Chicago, that carry Rush Limbaugh. If I want to consume that content,
those are my choices. There is no local station offering that content. As
the IBOC rash spreads, those stations, WISN and WLS will become closed to
me. They're nearly impossible to catch some days, anyway, due to noise.
The Din of iBiquity would close them entirely, as it has a number of other
stations formerly available here. And you know I'm no slouch when I want a
signal. But even I can't pull content out of the noise where IBOC is
concerned.

This is more an AM probem in current noise level environments. we find we
can not get diaries in LA with under 15 mv/m, and 20 is better.

Agfian, Am may not make it. News talk is migrating to FM now, including DC,
tallahassee, Phoenix, Salt Lake, etc. This may be inevitable. AM analog
sucks.

Eventually, the conversation about terminating analog AM will extend
beyond the coffee bars between GM's and into much higher places where
things get decided in earnest.

Maybe if nobody is making money, we will go all digital. I see this as a
beyond 5 year issue.